(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.18 2015나3807

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.18 2015나3807

구상금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract between B and C with respect to the vehicle C owned by B (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the owner of D vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”), and the co-defendant A is the driver of the Defendant vehicle.

B. At around 11:30 on August 10, 2014, A, while driving the Defendant vehicle and driving along the first lane of the 3-laned road in front of the 3-laned 4-lane of Sinscopic apartment zone, he immediately bypassed the vehicle to enter the oil station located on the right side of the above road, and shocked the front side of the Plaintiff’s right side of the vehicle of B driving driven along the four-lane of the above road to the left side of the Defendant vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). C.

On August 27, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 17,340,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident to B as insurance proceeds.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 7, Eul evidence 1 and 3 (including the number with which a branch number is attached) or video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred from the first lane to the fourth lane, thereby obstructing the passage of other vehicles. Thus, the defendant, the owner of the defendant vehicle, is obliged to pay the damages incurred by the accident in this case and pay damages to the plaintiff who acquired the subrogation of the damages claim for the accident in this case, the damages of 17,340,000 won and damages for delay.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the accident in this case occurred by the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle who has changed from the three lanes to the four lanes, and the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle who has violated the duty of the driver of the vehicle in front of the four lanes, so the defendant is obligated to bear only the damage corresponding to the ratio

B. Each of the evidence and evidence set forth above, as well as evidence No. 4.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.18 2015나19741

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.20 2015나31277

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.16 2015나6752

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.11 2015나16971

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.28 2015나13842